$290,000 Speeding Ticket

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34752334/ns/wo...news/?GT1=43001

 

 

 

ST. GALLEN, Switzerland - A Swiss court has slapped a wealthy speeder with a chalet-sized fine — a full $290,000.

 

Judges at the cantonal court in St. Gallen, in eastern Switzerland, based the record-breaking fine on the speeder's estimated wealth of more than $20 million.

 

A statement on the court's Web site says the driver — a repeat offender — drove up to 35 miles an hour faster than the 50-mile-an-hour limit.

 

Court clerk Heidi Baumann-Becker said Thursday the unidentified driver can appeal the decision, handed down in November, to the Swiss supreme court.

 

The Blick daily newspaper in Zurich reported the fine was more than twice the previous Swiss record of about $107,000.

 

 

Wow they don't mess around with tickets over there!

Awesome, if fines over there are relative to net worth, there is pretty well no deterrent for someone like me.

 

I can pay my fines with loose change I find jammed in the seat, which also happens to be where I keep all my savings.

ok, tickets based on personal wealth.

 

en.so, if you are poor , say you actually owe shit load of the money from the bank , then you speeding , the ticket shuold be negative,means you will actually make money!!! Good Law!!!

ok, tickets based on personal wealth.

 

en.so, if you are poor , say you actually owe shit load of the money from the bank , then you speeding , the ticket shuold be negative,means you will actually make money!!! Good Law!!!

 

Lol that would be full of fail. But honestly, if it's based off of a percentage of networth. Say your networth total was $100,000, and they charge a 1% of your networth, then a $1,000 would suck. Likewise if your networth is enormous, then it would equally suck, no one wants to dish out that money....

 

so lets say for shits and giggles that this guy's networth was 23 million. His 230,000 ticket was essentially 1% of his networth.

 

 

God that's a lot of money for such a small speeding ticket. I did 89 in a 55 back in my bat out of hell days and it was $421 and I got out of it.

I know I may not be famous saying this but Im not totally against a percentage of a persons net worth(or income) determining the fine. Say I make $20,000 a year paying a $150 ticket may hurt me a little, but someone making $200,000 a year that $150 ticket doesnt mean shit. Say maybe 0.2% or something like that for Speeding and move up from there.

 

Mainly I was thinking about this as a way to cure the Drunk Driving issue in the US. Fines should be much much higher. I first thought say like a $10,000 fine, but that doesnt mean much to some people and some it means a lot and will defiantly be a determent. Instead maybe say 66% of ones salary for the first offense, 125% for a second.

 

The numbers are purely fictional, thats not exactly what I would do if it was up to me. DUIs are just another way to collect more taxes and create jobs(Cops, Lawyers, Addiction Consoling places, etc.), no one actually wants to fix it in the Government.

My uncle lives in St. Gallen.

So, maybe they should punish the wealthy more from rape and murder? Put them away longer? After all, they are rich and deserve that? Paying money for a crime is silly, especially paying more to have a diversion. In the US we just pay more to act like it never happened.

I know I may not be famous saying this but Im not totally against a percentage of a persons net worth(or income) determining the fine. Say I make $20,000 a year paying a $150 ticket may hurt me a little, but someone making $200,000 a year that $150 ticket doesnt mean shit. Say maybe 0.2% or something like that for Speeding and move up from there.

 

Mainly I was thinking about this as a way to cure the Drunk Driving issue in the US. Fines should be much much higher. I first thought say like a $10,000 fine, but that doesnt mean much to some people and some it means a lot and will defiantly be a determent. Instead maybe say 66% of ones salary for the first offense, 125% for a second.

 

The numbers are purely fictional, thats not exactly what I would do if it was up to me. DUIs are just another way to collect more taxes and create jobs(Cops, Lawyers, Addiction Consoling places, etc.), no one actually wants to fix it in the Government.

 

There is a glass-ceiling I would imagine with heavy fines (i.e. $10K) that ARE NOT relative to networth

 

Avg. income in the US is something like what?... $30K or so? (seems low but I thought thats what Ive read) A $10K fine for an avg earner gets to the point where the person receiving it just says fcuk it. They dont expect to be able to pay it anyway

There is a glass-ceiling I would imagine with heavy fines (i.e. $10K) that ARE NOT relative to networth

 

Avg. income in the US is something like what?... $30K or so? (seems low but I thought thats what Ive read) A $10K fine for an avg earner gets to the point where the person receiving it just says fcuk it. They dont expect to be able to pay it anyway

The numbers were purely fictional. I just pulled them out of thin air.

The numbers were purely fictional. I just pulled them out of thin air.

 

so what are the real numbers than?

 

Let's bring Robin Hood back

So, maybe they should punish the wealthy more from rape and murder? Put them away longer? After all, they are rich and deserve that? Paying money for a crime is silly, especially paying more to have a diversion. In the US we just pay more to act like it never happened.

 

 

 

I know I may not be famous saying this but Im not totally against a percentage of a persons net worth(or income) determining the fine. Say I make $20,000 a year paying a $150 ticket may hurt me a little, but someone making $200,000 a year that $150 ticket doesnt mean shit. Say maybe 0.2% or something like that for Speeding and move up from there.

 

Mainly I was thinking about this as a way to cure the Drunk Driving issue in the US. Fines should be much much higher. I first thought say like a $10,000 fine, but that doesnt mean much to some people and some it means a lot and will defiantly be a determent. Instead maybe say 66% of ones salary for the first offense, 125% for a second.

 

The numbers are purely fictional, thats not exactly what I would do if it was up to me. DUIs are just another way to collect more taxes and create jobs(Cops, Lawyers, Addiction Consoling places, etc.), no one actually wants to fix it in the Government.

 

so let me ask you, should bail be set depending on the crime committed or the net worth of the individual?

I imagine that fines based on networth are not practical because when you get a moving violation or parking ticket, they'd have to research your net worth? seems like a lot of effort especially when the average outlaw's networth is too low to make it worth while. Also opens up a can o worms in the privacy department.

 

So, maybe they should punish the wealthy more from rape and murder? Put them away longer? After all, they are rich and deserve that? Paying money for a crime is silly, especially paying more to have a diversion. In the US we just pay more to act like it never happened.

 

Doesn't seem like a good comparison to me, as you are talking about crimes with obvious victims of your actions. If someone is going to commit those crimes the deterrant in their head has nothing to do with money, it is violating one of the most fundamental lessons we are taught in life. That deterant in theory should be equal to everyone whether you are rich or poor, and should be punishable as such.

o

Speeding on the other hand, assuming we aren't talking about jail time sort of speeds then people may only be fearing a monetary penalty. Which becomes absolutely irrelevant at a certain point, and is not an effective deterrant for the crime.

 

Not necessarily saying I support sliding fines, but that I don't think that a good comparison.

 

Personally I know that although i'm only a student at the moment that my biggest fear comes from demerit points not from the monetary fine. Yes, the money is a pain in the ass but gain enough points within the period and your license is gone. They annoy me to hell, but it's effective...

 

Retarded law. And people with fast cars already get punished more because we get fucked on insurance with speeding tickets.

So, maybe they should punish the wealthy more from rape and murder? Put them away longer? After all, they are rich and deserve that? Paying money for a crime is silly, especially paying more to have a diversion. In the US we just pay more to act like it never happened.

 

That comparison makes no sense, if anybody rapes/murders someone the punishment is the same because its 'fair' for eveyone. Rich or poor you'd lose years from your life. If a millionaire gets a $300 speeding, he can pull out his wallet and pay it on the spot. If I (or anyone in my shoes) gets a $300 speeding ticket, that almost 25% of my monthly income.... It would be more of a deterrent if that millionaire loses 25% of his income if he speeds.

Retarded law. And people with fast cars already get punished more because we get fucked on insurance with speeding tickets.

 

It's not retarded, the Swiss don't like people speeding at all.

 

Same for the Finnish government.

That comparison makes no sense, if anybody rapes/murders someone the punishment is the same because its 'fair' for eveyone. Rich or poor you'd lose years from your life. If a millionaire gets a $300 speeding, he can pull out his wallet and pay it on the spot. If I (or anyone in my shoes) gets a $300 speeding ticket, that almost 25% of my monthly income.... It would be more of a deterrent if that millionaire loses 25% of his income if he speeds.

 

I think it makes sense. In life you gotta pay to play. Those with more money many of times didnt play as much to get to that point. Now they have that money, so they can play more. I dont give a shit if a guy who makes a 100 times less has to pay the same. Its a speeding ticket. And too many circumstances play into speeding.

If everything in life was scaled on a pro-rata basis there would be no difference between the wealthy and the poor as relative cost-of-living would be the same and many would argue there would be no motivation to financially succeed.

 

Apparently this notion works for those living in Switzerland. For me it runs counterintuitive as all men are not created equally - some are much lazier. That's for another discussion however I will say penalizing someone more heavily for the same crime based upon monetary success is an unfair concept to me. Glad the Swiss are comfortable with it because I sure as hell am not.

 

Using the same multiple for penalization presented in the article (1.45% of net worth), if Bill Gates got pinched for the same speeding ticket his fine would be 580 million or just over half a billion. Seems fair to me

If everything in life was scaled on a pro-rata basis there would be no difference between the wealthy and the poor as relative cost-of-living would be the same and many would argue there would be no motivation to financially succeed.

 

Apparently this notion works for those living in Switzerland. For me it runs counterintuitive as all men are not created equally - some are much lazier. That's for another discussion however I will say penalizing someone more heavily for the same crime based upon monetary success is an unfair concept to me. Glad the Swiss are comfortable with it because I sure as hell am not.

 

Using the same multiple for penalization presented in the article (1.45% of net worth), if Bill Gates got pinched for the same speeding ticket his fine would be 580 million or just over half a billion. Seems fair to me

 

I could not agree more with everything you said here. It blows my mind people dont see it this way.....more then likely becuase they wont be penalized as much...

Do they throw in a bank with the speeding ticket?

Hmm I think that is a new high record, our Finns record is only 200000$....

 

Welcome to friikkin Finland, we have a similar system for heavy speeders, but your fine is related to your income. (Afteryou exceed a certain limit) Guess it works fine for a normal income group, but when they catch aperson with very high income it becomes ridiculous.

 

Then again I think none of theese fines have been paid as such but been reduced to much smaller sum like 5k$ or similar. Doubt the Swiss guy will pay it either, lawyers can do magics

 

 

Doesn't seem like a good comparison to me, as you are talking about crimes with obvious victims of your actions. If someone is going to commit those crimes the deterrant in their head has nothing to do with money, it is violating one of the most fundamental lessons we are taught in life. That deterant in theory should be equal to everyone whether you are rich or poor, and should be punishable as such.

o

Speeding on the other hand, assuming we aren't talking about jail time sort of speeds then people may only be fearing a monetary penalty. Which becomes absolutely irrelevant at a certain point, and is not an effective deterrant for the crime.

 

Not necessarily saying I support sliding fines, but that I don't think that a good comparison.

 

Personally I know that although i'm only a student at the moment that my biggest fear comes from demerit points not from the monetary fine. Yes, the money is a pain in the ass but gain enough points within the period and your license is gone. They annoy me to hell, but it's effective...

 

I know my analogy does not make sense. What I am trying to say is that:

 

1. it is stupid to begin with.

 

2. where will they draw a line with this logic?

 

3. it is the speeders fault that they speed. An equal punishment for the level of crime committed should be applied. A $100 ticket may not be significant to a wealthy person, but that should not be their problem. It should be that $100 is the price you pay for this "level" of crime....and your time,money and life should be in jeopardy if you want to steal, rape, or kill. In America, the poor bitch that buying a pack or cigarettes is somehow "regressive" because it takes more of their income than that of a wealthy person. However, it is their own fault that they choose to buy what they want and earn what they want. We somehow reversed the situation where it is acceptable to do the opposite and charge the wealthy more.

 

I am tired of being punished for wanting to provide more for my family. I dont think I should have to pay more for a road that a person who makes less uses as much. I dont think I should have to be punished differently for improperly using them.

 

I thought the swiss had more sense than that, obviously they don't, a country that survives on managing wealth has such idiotic Neanderthal law, people are obsessed with screwing the wealthy which seems very stupid to me since it is not very smart or healthy to bite the hand that feeds you!